To the Business Secretary:
For Clarity - Attempt 425.
425) "Company Man" - Warren Haynes.
or woman.
Dear Mr Javid,
Warren Haynes' song goes;
"Sometimes in this world you gotta make a stand,
Never wanted to be no company man"
which are our sentiments entirely.
However, we invite you and anyone else who happens to read this email/blog to be the company Chairman of the Property Member Board for a short while. You will need to have unimpeachable integrity. All you have to do is:
1. Go to www.ombudsman-services.org
2. Click on the, "Information" box.
3. Then click on the, "Annual Reports" box.
4. Next click, "Annual Report 2009/10 Property."
5. Now just sit back and read the report .....
You will see that this report has 8 pages. It is full of information but the interpretation of that information leads in two totally different directions. One direction is that of DJS Research (a totally independent research group who carried out three Customer Satisfaction Reports for OS:Property) the other is the one taken by the Labour Peer, Dame Maggie Jones, Chair of its Property Member Board. This was DJS Research' s 2nd report. Their report can be read in full if you enter: DJS Research in the box on the top right of the home page - scroll down to 2009/10. It's provides a remarkable insight into what goes on behind the scenes at this private redress scheme.
Q. Why is the Chair's interpretation so different from that of DJS Research's?
Dame Maggie Jones fully endorses the claim made by Ombudsman Services:Property that it is, "building a reputation as a respected and versatile provider." (page 8)
DJS Research on the other hand state;
"Many were complaining about the poor information/advice which could potentially have led to a costly purchasing mistake far in excess of a few hundred pounds." (as was our case with Monk and Partners)
they continue,
"As for the last year overall satisfaction levels were low." (page 7)
Q. If overall satisfaction levels were so low how does that equate with Dame Maggie Jones' endorsement of the company as being one that was building a reputation as a respected provider?
Q. How can Ombudsman Services:Property be, "a respected provider" when complainants said that their overall satisfaction levels were low?
Q. Are the low satisfaction levels experienced by complainants the reason why, "other organisations in the property sector want to join?"
Q. Just who exactly is, "respecting" the company?
Q. And just what exactly is the company actually, "providing?"
As a temporary Chairman you will have seen that the key issues were ones of money and the logic of Ombudsman Services:Property's recommendations. On the one hand complainants were losing thousands and thousands of pounds whilst on the other the company was offering them a few hundred pounds of, "financial goodwill."
Q. As Chairman how do you understand that anomaly and what steps would you have taken to help Ombudsman Services:Property build a truly respectable reputation?
Regarding the so-called "financial goodwill." DJS Research say,
"This should be looked at and either expectations could be managed more tightly from the beginning of the claim or the scale of the financial goodwill be increased to be more in line with the financial losses incurred by the complainant as a result of the problem." (page 7)
On page 8 of the report Dame Maggie Jones made no mention of DJS Research's findings and recommendations.
Q. Why, as Chairman, did Dame Maggie Jones not respond to such critical findings?
Instead she said,
"It is a pleasure to be able to promote this service. I am not surprised that other organisations in the property sector want to join and want to promote the benefits of Ombudsman Services:Property to their members - professionalism and cost effectiveness - key concepts in these challenging times." (page 8)
Dame Maggie Jones, as Chairman of the Property Member Board seems to also be promoting a lack of logic and poor use of evidence. She, like you, will have read DJS' Customer Satisfaction Report where it states;
"Nearly a half were dissatisfied with the logic of its recommendations, use of evidence and extent to which they were reasonable."
Q. As Chairman what would your take on all of this have been in those challenging times?
Q. Why is a Labour Peer taking pleasure in promoting a service where half of its consumers were dissatisfied with the company's recommendations, its use of evidence and the reasonableness of those recommendations?
She finished with,
"This coming year will be interesting ... I am looking forward to working with Lewis Shand Smith and his team taking this challenging agenda forward."
Q. As Chairman how would you have worked with Lewis Shand Smith and his team in taking that challenging agenda forward?
Q. As a temporary Chairman with unimpeachable integrity would you make a stand or are you a company man or woman?
Thank you for taking the time to read the information and taking part.
The Ombudsmans61percent Campaign is seeking:
- answers from Vince Cable.
- answers from Francis Maude.
- answers from Nick Clegg.
- answers from Mark Prisk.
- answers from Jo Swinson.
- answers from Sajid Javid.
- answers from Dame Janet Finch.
- answers from Lewis Shand Smith.
- answers from Dame Maggie Jones.
- answers from the Ombudsman Services Board.
- answers from the Property member Board.
- a public inquiry into the workings of Ombudsman Services (a company formerly trading as the Surveyors Ombudsman Service) and the role of The RICS.
- compensation for the victims of the ombudsman's illogical Final decisions.
- compensation for the victims of the executive's maladministration.
- the setting up of a truly, "fair" and "independent" redress scheme free from RICS' influence.
As Chairman for a short while we welcome your views on the challenges set.
Thanks.
Steve Gilbert - The Ombudsmans61percent Campaign.
No comments:
Post a Comment